DOCSLIB.ORG

Innovation Driven Outcomes Focused September 2020 Presentation Disclaimer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Innovation Driven Outcomes Focused September 2020 Presentation Disclaimer Innovation Driven Outcomes Focused September 2020 Presentation disclaimer The Company may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in its This presentation contains forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on the Company’s identify forward-looking statements by the words “will,” “expect,” “intend,” forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, “plan,” “objective,” “believe,” “estimate,” “potential,” “continue” and “ongoing,” intentions and expectations disclosed in the forward-looking statements the Company or the negative of these terms, or other comparable terminology intended to makes. The forward-looking statements in this presentation represent the Company’s views identify statements about the future. These statements are based on as of the date of this presentation. The Company anticipates that subsequent events and management’s current beliefs and expectations. These statements include but developments will cause its views to change. However, while the Company may elect to are not limited to statements regarding Inhibrx, Inc.’s (the “Company”) business update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, the Company has no strategy, the Company’s plans to develop and commercialize its product current intention of doing so except to the extent required by applicable law. You should, candidates, the safety and efficacy of the Company’s product candidates, the therefore, not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing the Company’s Company’s plans and expected timing with respect to clinical trials and views as of any date subsequent to the date of this presentation. regulatory filings and approvals, and the size and growth potential of the markets for the Company’s product candidates. These statements involve substantial The investigational product candidates discussed in this presentation have not been known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the approved or licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or by any other regulatory Company’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be authority, and they are not commercially available in any market. This presentation also materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward- contains estimates and other statistical data made by independent parties and by the looking statements. Additional information regarding the Company’s risks and Company relating to market size and growth and other data about its industry. This data uncertainties are described in its Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with involves a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on August 12, 2020 in the weight to such estimates. In addition, projections, assumptions, and estimates of the section titled “Risk Factors,” and in other filings the Company may make with the Company’s future performance and the future performance of the markets in which it SEC from time to time. operates are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk. This presentation shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy securities. 2 Key investment highlights Validation from industry Four clinical programs Proprietary single leading partners with upcoming readouts domain antibody (sdAb) platform Potential rapid path Experienced leadership to first approval and team aligned with financial sustainability investors 3 Four differentiated clinical programs addressing large market opportunities !" INBRX-109 INBRX-106 INBRX-105 INBRX-101 Tetravalent DR5 agonist Hexavalent OX40 agonist PD-L1x4-1BB tetravalent AAT-Fc fusion protein + Single agent activity in + Potential across numerous conditional agonist + Potential for first meaningful difficult to treat tumors tumors, including cold tumors + Potential across all PD-L1 expressing advance for patients in 35 years + Potential rapid path to + Large early studies in both the tumors + Estimated ~$1B+ market size approval in chondrosarcoma, U.S. and China + Large early studies in both the U.S. registration study starting in + Human clinical PK data and China mid 2021 + Registration studies could + Registration study could start in 2022 + Registration studies could start in + First combination cohorts start in 2022 2022 initiated 4 Inhibrx’s modular sdAb platform Versatile and innovative formats enable validated Inhibrx multivalent formats complex target biology to be exploited Precision engineering 75 kDa 90 kDa 105 kDa 120 kDa 135 kDa – Multivalent – precise valency selection engineered to specific target biology – Multispecific – engineered for optimal synergistic or co-dependent functionalities Inhibrx multispecific formats – Smaller than conventional antibodies Readily manufactured at high yields using standard processes 75 kDa 90 kDa 105 kDa 120 kDa 135 kDa 5 INBRX-109 Tetravalent DR5 Agonist Death receptor 5 target overview Death receptor 5 (DR5) is a receptor y for the tumor necrosis factor-related c apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) 2 4 >4 len a V DR5 activation naturally eliminates damaged and neoplastic cells cancer cancer cancer Higher order clustering of DR5 is required to drive signaling Apoptosis Potential to treat cancers that are healthy healthy healthy unresponsive to immunotherapy DR5 requires the right valency to trigger apoptosis of cancer cells and spare healthy cells 7 Valency drives DR5-mediated apoptosis Impact of valency on DR5 induced tumor cell death Antibody TRAIL INBRX-109 Tetravalent 100 Anti-DR5 mAb 75 (Bivalent) DR5 DR5 DR5 TRAIL 50 Viability (Trivalent) % 25 INBRX-109 (Tetravalent) 0 cancer cancer cancer 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 1 10 Concentration (nM) INBRX-109 is 100x more potent in preclinical healthy healthy healthy assays compared to first generation bivalent Weak Moderate Strong and trivalent agonists Apoptosis 8 INBRX-109 engineered to avoid hepatotoxicity Therapeutic format selection designed to balance efficacy and safety Human hepatocyte toxicity assay TAS266 TAS266 INBRX-109 INBRX-109 Hex-1F5 Hepatocytes may be subject to on-target toxicity for DR5 pathway agonism + Previous tetravalent DR5 agonist failed PE-ADAs in the clinic due to hepatotoxicity – likely due + to hyper-clustering by anti-drug antibodies PE-ADAs In vitro hepatic cell (HepaRG) death assay 4 4 4 Functional recapitulates toxicity of TAS266 + pre-existing 8 6 valency anti-drug antibodies (PE-ADAs) in pooled 125 human immunoglobulins 100 Proper valency is key: Hexavalent (Hex-1F5) is also hepatotoxic 75 50 Viability % Tetrameric INBRx-109 did not induce 25 hepatic cell apoptosis; lacks sites 0 for PE-ADAs mediated crosslinking 9 Ph1 INBRX-109 trial design and status First in human Phase 1 trial started Nov. 2018 PART 1: PART 2: Dose expansion PART 3: Dose escalation cohorts Combination studies completed ongoing initiated 0.3 to 30 mg/kg Aug. 2019 Initial expansion cohort indications were selected based on in vitro and nd in vivo sensitivities to the DR5 pathway 20 Pancreatic adenocarcinoma 2 N=20 and clinical data from prior DR5 agonists line with FOLFIRI Mesothelioma with Chondrosarcoma 20 20 Cis-/Carboplatin & Pemetrexed Result: MTD not reached 10 Synovial sarcoma 20 Malignant pleural mesothelioma 10 Gastric adenocarcinoma Investigation of a predictive biomarker of pathway sensitivity is ongoing 10 Fast to market opportunity Chondrosarcoma Incidence rate PFS from failed study of ~1 in 200,000 persons per year Therapeutic IPI-926 (HH) Control arm Placebo Subject number 100 (2:1) ~1,400 Efficacy data PFS 3.7 mo vs 2.9 mo Placebo cases per year Comment Negative study No approved therapeutic for the treatment of Chondrosarcoma USA Worldwide 11 *The figures on this slide represent market research estimates. INBRX-109 data and registration-enabling study design in chondrosarcoma INBRX-109 in chondrosarcoma: Potential registration-enabling study design: Best 3mo 4mo 6mo Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Response Phase 2 study of INBRX-109 as any-line therapy in SD (-13%) relapsed unresectable or metastatic chondrosarcoma SD (-7%) ► Randomization 2:1 PR (-32%) ► Conventional (primary) chondrosarcoma, grade 1, 2 and 3, unresectable or metastatic, any line of therapy PR (-55%) ► Stratification by line of therapy, Grade, PS SD (-3%) ► SD (-4%) ► INBRX-109 Placebo SD (-4%) * SD (-1%) ► Until PD or toxicity SD (+7%) ► PD Endpoints Primary: PFS Weeks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Secondary: OS, RR/DCR, QoL Cut point 22-Jul-2020, study ongoing Disclaimer: Per investigator assessments, not confirmed by central radiology review, and data subject to change ► Ongoing PR=Partial Response, SD=Stable Disease, PD=Progressive Disease 12 *Off-study per subject request INBRX-109 potential in multiple indications FUTURE POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES Solid tumors STUDIES INITIATED + IAP antagonists IN Q3 OF 2020 Hematologic tumors INITIAL INDICATIONS Pancreatic – 2nd line + Bcl-2 inhibitors FOLFIRI Chondrosarcoma any line NSCLC Registration-enabling study Mesothelioma + various combo agents in planning stage as single agent Cis-/Carboplatin & Pemetrexed Gastric Mesothelioma Synovial Sarcoma + various combo agents First line in combination or Additional Sarcoma nd rd 2 or 3 line single agent Indications 13 INBRX-106 Hexavalent OX40 Agonist INBRX-106
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The TNF and TNF Receptor Review Superfamilies: Integrating Mammalian Biology
    Cell, Vol. 104, 487±501, February 23, 2001, Copyright 2001 by Cell Press The TNF and TNF Receptor Review Superfamilies: Integrating Mammalian Biology Richard M. Locksley,*²³k Nigel Killeen,²k The receptors and ligands in this superfamily have and Michael J. Lenardo§k unique structural attributes that couple them directly to *Department of Medicine signaling pathways for cell proliferation, survival, and ² Department of Microbiology and Immunology differentiation. Thus, they have assumed prominent ³ Howard Hughes Medical Institute roles in the generation of tissues and transient microen- University of California, San Francisco vironments. Most TNF/TNFR SFPs are expressed in the San Francisco, California 94143 immune system, where their rapid and potent signaling § Laboratory of Immunology capabilities are crucial in coordinating the proliferation National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and protective functions of pathogen-reactive cells. National Institutes of Health Here, we review the organization of the TNF/TNFR SF Bethesda, Maryland 20892 and how these proteins have been adapted for pro- cesses as seemingly disparate as host defense and or- ganogenesis. In interpreting this large and highly active Introduction area of research, we have focused on common themes that unite the actions of these genes in different tissues. Three decades ago, lymphotoxin (LT) and tumor necro- We also discuss the evolutionary success of this super- sis factor (TNF) were identified as products of lympho- familyÐsuccess that we infer from its expansion across cytes and macrophages that caused the lysis of certain the mammalian genome and from its many indispens- types of cells, especially tumor cells (Granger et al., able roles in mammalian biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Activating Death Receptor DR5 As a Therapeutic Strategy for Rhabdomyosarcoma
    International Scholarly Research Network ISRN Oncology Volume 2012, Article ID 395952, 10 pages doi:10.5402/2012/395952 Review Article Activating Death Receptor DR5 as a Therapeutic Strategy for Rhabdomyosarcoma Zhigang Kang,1, 2 Shi-Yong Sun,3 and Liang Cao1 1 Genetics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA 2 Laboratory of Proteomics and Analytical Technologies, SAIC-Frederick, Inc., NCI Frederick, Frederick, MD 21702, USA 3 Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA Correspondence should be addressed to Liang Cao, [email protected] Received 4 January 2012; Accepted 24 January 2012 Academic Editors: E. Boven and S. Mandruzzato Copyright © 2012 Zhigang Kang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is the most common soft tissue sarcoma in children. It is believed to arise from skeletal muscle progenitors, preserving the expression of genes critical for embryonic myogenic development such as MYOD1 and myogenin. RMS is classified as embryonal, which is more common in younger children, or alveolar, which is more prevalent in elder children and adults. Despite aggressive management including surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, the outcome for children with metastatic RMS is dismal, and the prognosis has remained unchanged for decades. Apoptosis is a highly regulated process critical for embryonic development and tissue and organ homeostasis. Like other types of cancers, RMS develops by evading intrinsic apoptosis via mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene.
    [Show full text]
  • Ligand–Receptor Binding Revealed by the TNF Family Member TALL-1
    articles Ligand–receptor binding revealed by the TNF family member TALL-1 Yingfang Liu*†, Xia Hong*†, John Kappler*‡§, Ling Jiang*, Rongguang Zhangk, Liangguo Xu*, Cheol-Ho Pan*, Wesley E. Martin*, Robert C. Murphy*, Hong-Bing Shu*{, Shaodong Dai*‡ & Gongyi Zhang*§ * Integrated Department of Immunology, National Jewish Medical and Research Center, ‡ Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and § Department of Pharmacology, Biomolecular Structure Program, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Health Science Center, 1400 Jackson Street, Denver, Colorado 80206, USA { Department of Cell Biology and Genetics, College of Life Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China k Structural Biology Section, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA † These authors contributed equally to this work ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... The tumour necrosis factor (TNF) ligand TALL-1 and its cognate receptors, BCMA, TACI and BAFF-R, were recently identified as members of the TNF superfamily, which are essential factors contributing to B-cell maturation. The functional, soluble fragment of TALL-1 (sTALL-1) forms a virus-like assembly for its proper function. Here we determine the crystal structures of sTALL-1 complexed with the extracellular domains of BCMA and BAFF-R at 2.6 and 2.5 A˚ , respectively. The single cysteine-rich domain
    [Show full text]
  • TRAIL and Cardiovascular Disease—A Risk Factor Or Risk Marker: a Systematic Review
    Journal of Clinical Medicine Review TRAIL and Cardiovascular Disease—A Risk Factor or Risk Marker: A Systematic Review Katarzyna Kakareko 1,* , Alicja Rydzewska-Rosołowska 1 , Edyta Zbroch 2 and Tomasz Hryszko 1 1 2nd Department of Nephrology and Hypertension with Dialysis Unit, Medical University of Białystok, 15-276 Białystok, Poland; [email protected] (A.R.-R.); [email protected] (T.H.) 2 Department of Internal Medicine and Hypertension, Medical University of Białystok, 15-276 Białystok, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) is a pro-apoptotic protein showing broad biological functions. Data from animal studies indicate that TRAIL may possibly contribute to the pathophysiology of cardiomyopathy, atherosclerosis, ischemic stroke and abdomi- nal aortic aneurysm. It has been also suggested that TRAIL might be useful in cardiovascular risk stratification. This systematic review aimed to evaluate whether TRAIL is a risk factor or risk marker in cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) focusing on major adverse cardiovascular events. Two databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library) were searched until December 2020 without a year limit in accor- dance to the PRISMA guidelines. A total of 63 eligible original studies were identified and included in our systematic review. Studies suggest an important role of TRAIL in disorders such as heart failure, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, ischemic stroke, peripheral artery disease, and pul- monary and gestational hypertension. Most evidence associates reduced TRAIL levels and increased TRAIL-R2 concentration with all-cause mortality in patients with CVDs. It is, however, unclear Citation: Kakareko, K.; whether low TRAIL levels should be considered as a risk factor rather than a risk marker of CVDs.
    [Show full text]
  • Proteomic Bioprofiles and Mechanistic Pathways of Progression to Heart Failure: the HOMAGE Study
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Enlighten Ferreira, J. P. et al. (2019) Proteomic bioprofiles and mechanistic pathways of progression to heart failure: the HOMAGE study. Circulation, 12(5), e005897. (doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.118.005897) This is the author’s final accepted version. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/186516/ Deposited on: 13 May 2019 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk Proteomic Bioprofiles and Mechanistic Pathways of Progression to Heart Failure: the HOMAGE (Heart OMics in AGEing) study João Pedro Ferreira, MD, PhD1,2* & Job Verdonschot, MD3,4*; Timothy Collier, PhD5; Ping Wang, PhD4; Anne Pizard, PhD1,6; Christian Bär, MD, PhD7; Jens Björkman, PhD8; Alessandro Boccanelli, MD9; Javed Butler, MD, PhD10; Andrew Clark, MD, PhD11; John G. Cleland, MD, PhD12,13; Christian Delles, MD, PhD14; Javier Diez, MD, PhD15,16,17,18; Nicolas Girerd, MD, PhD1; Arantxa González, MD, PhD15,16,17; Mark Hazebroek, MD, PhD3; Anne-Cécile Huby, PhD1; Wouter Jukema, MD, PhD19; Roberto Latini, MD, PhD20; Joost Leenders, MD, PhD21; Daniel Levy, MD, PhD22,23; Alexandre Mebazaa, MD, PhD24; Harald Mischak, MD, PhD25; Florence Pinet, MD, PhD26; Patrick Rossignol, MD, PhD1; Naveed Sattar, MD, PhD27; Peter Sever, MD, PhD28; Jan A. Staessen, MD, PhD29,30; Thomas Thum, MD, PhD7,31; Nicolas Vodovar, PhD24; Zhen-Yu Zhang, MD29; Stephane Heymans, MD, PhD3,32,33** & Faiez Zannad, MD, PhD1** *co-first authors **co-last authors 1 Université de Lorraine, Inserm, Centre d’Investigations Cliniques- Plurithématique 14-33, and Inserm U1116, CHRU, F-CRIN INI-CRCT (Cardiovascular and Renal Clinical Trialists), Nancy, France.
    [Show full text]
  • On the TRAIL of Better Therapies: Understanding TNFRSF Structure-Function
    Review On the TRAIL of Better Therapies: Understanding TNFRSF Structure-Function Éva S. Vanamee and Denise L. Faustman * Immunobiology Laboratories, Massachusetts General Hospital, 13th Street, Building 149, Rm. 3602, Boston, MA 02129, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel: +1-617-726-4084 Received:02 February 2020; Accepted: 17 March 2020; Published: 20 March 2020 Abstract: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) superfamily ligands show diverse biological functions, such as the induction of apoptotic cell death or cell survival and proliferation, making them excellent therapeutic targets for cancer and autoimmunity. We review the latest literature on TNF receptor superfamily signaling with a focus on structure-function. Using combinatorics, we argue that receptors that cluster on the cell surface and are activated by membrane-bound ligands need to arrange in a highly ordered manner, as the probability of random ligand and receptor arrangements matching up for receptor activation is very low. A growing body of evidence indicates that antiparallel receptor dimers that sequester the ligand binding site cluster on the cell surface, forming a hexagonal lattice. Upon ligand binding, this arrangement puts the activated receptors at the right distance to accommodate the downstream signaling partners. The data also suggest that the same geometry is utilized regardless of receptor type. The unified model provides important clues about TNF receptor signaling and should aid the design of better therapies for cancer and various immune mediated diseases. Keywords: TRAIL; TRAIL receptors; apoptosis; TNFSF signaling; receptor clustering; antiparallel dimer; hexagonal lattice; cancer 1. Introduction The TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL/Apo2L) [1] is a member of the TNF superfamily (TNFSF).
    [Show full text]
  • Biolegend.Com
    Mechanisms of Cell Death TRAIL (TNFSF10) TNF-α Death Receptor 4 (TNFRSF10A/TRAIL-R1) Death Receptor 5 Zombie Dyes (TNFRSF10B/TRAIL-R2) Propidium Iodide (PI) BAT1, TIM-4 TNF RI (TNFRSF1A) 7-Amino-Actinomycin (7-AAD) MER TNF RII (TNFRSF1B) FAS-L GAS6 (TNFSF6/CD178) TRAIL (TNFSF10) Apoptotic Cell Death Domain Zombie Dyes Phosphatidylserine K63 Ubiquitin NH2 Removal ICAM3? ROCK1 NH CD14 2 Eat-Me Signals FAS Death Inducing Cytoskeletal Rearrangement, (TNFRSF6/CD95) Signaling Complex (DISC) TRADD Cytoskeletal Rearrangement, TRADD Decoy Receptor 2 FADD (TNFRSF10D/TRAIL-R4) Actomysin Contraction Engulfment RIP1 TWEAK RIP1 oxLDL (TNFSF12) FADD CIAP1/2 K63 Ubiquitination Blebbing CD36 Death Receptor 3 TWEAK (TNFSF12) PI FADD (TNFRSF25, APO-3) 7-AAD TRAF1 FADD Procaspase 8,10 TRAF 3 Phagocyte FLIP PANX1 Macrophage Monocyte Neutrophil Dendritic Cell Fibroblast Mast Cell Procaspase 8,10 NF-kB TWEAK-R (TNFRSF12A/Fn14) Find-Me Signals Lysophosphocholine C Caspase 8,10 TRAF5 TRAF2 Sphingosine-1-Phosphate G2A? Nucleotides A Decoy TRAIL Receptor R1 (TNFRSF23) Bid Cell Survival ATP, UTP Decoy TRAIL Receptor R2 (TNFRSF22) Sphingosine-1 TRADD Phosphate Receptor Decoy Receptor 1 (TNFRSF10C/TRAIL-R3) Procaspase 3 Proliferation RIP1 G P2y2 t-Bid Bcl-2 T Chemotaxis, Caspase 3 Bcl-2-xL, MCL-1 ? ICAD RIP1 Engulfment Degradation Bax, Bak Oligomerization TRADD Death Receptor 6 Extracellular ATP Bacterial pore-forming toxins TRAIL (TNFSF10) ICAD (TNFRSF21) Monosodium urate crystals Cholesterol crystals Death Receptor DNA Fragmentation Cholera toxin B, Mitochondria
    [Show full text]
  • Targeting TRAIL-Rs in KRAS-Driven Cancer Silvia Von Karstedt 1,2,3 and Henning Walczak2,4,5
    von Karstedt and Walczak Cell Death Discovery (2020) 6:14 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41420-020-0249-4 Cell Death Discovery PERSPECTIVE Open Access An unexpected turn of fortune: targeting TRAIL-Rs in KRAS-driven cancer Silvia von Karstedt 1,2,3 and Henning Walczak2,4,5 Abstract Twenty-one percent of all human cancers bear constitutively activating mutations in the proto-oncogene KRAS. This incidence is substantially higher in some of the most inherently therapy-resistant cancers including 30% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC), 50% of colorectal cancers, and 95% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC). Importantly, survival of patients with KRAS-mutated PDAC and NSCLC has not significantly improved since the 1970s highlighting an urgent need to re-examine how oncogenic KRAS influences cell death signaling outputs. Interestingly, cancers expressing oncogenic KRAS manage to escape antitumor immunity via upregulation of programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1). Recently, the development of next-generation KRASG12C-selective inhibitors has shown therapeutic efficacy by triggering antitumor immunity. Yet, clinical trials testing immune checkpoint blockade in KRAS- mutated cancers have yielded disappointing results suggesting other, additional means endow these tumors with the capacity to escape immune recognition. Intriguingly, oncogenic KRAS reprograms regulated cell death pathways triggered by death receptors of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor superfamily. Perverting the course of their intended function, KRAS-mutated cancers use endogenous TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) and its receptor(s) to promote tumor growth and metastases. Yet, endogenous TRAIL–TRAIL-receptor signaling can be therapeutically targeted and, excitingly, this may not only counteract oncogenic KRAS-driven cancer cell migration, invasion, and metastasis, but also the immunosuppressive reprogramming of the tumor microenvironment it causes.
    [Show full text]
  • Cell Structure & Function
    Cell Structure & Function Antibodies and Reagents BioLegend is ISO 13485:2016 Certified Toll-Free Tel: (US & Canada): 1.877.BIOLEGEND (246.5343) Tel: 858.768.5800 biolegend.com 02-0012-03 World-Class Quality | Superior Customer Support | Outstanding Value Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................3 Cell Biology Antibody Validation .............................................................................................................................................4 Cell Structure/ Organelles ..........................................................................................................................................................8 Cell Development and Differentiation ................................................................................................................................10 Growth Factors and Receptors ...............................................................................................................................................12 Cell Proliferation, Growth, and Viability...............................................................................................................................14 Cell Cycle ........................................................................................................................................................................................16 Cell Signaling ................................................................................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Death Receptor 5, a New Member of the TNFR Family, and DR4 Induce FADD-Dependent Apoptosis and Activate the NF-␬B Pathway
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Immunity, Vol. 7, 821±830, December, 1997, Copyright 1997 by Cell Press Death Receptor 5, a New Member of the TNFR Family, and DR4 Induce FADD-Dependent Apoptosis and Activate the NF-kB Pathway Preet M. Chaudhary, Michael Eby, a C-terminal death domain through which it binds to the Alan Jasmin, Angela Bookwalter, death domain of Fas/Apo-1 (Boldin et al., 1995; Chinnai- Jessica Murray, and Leroy Hood* yan et al., 1995). Despite its sequence homology to the Department of Molecular Biotechnology similar domains present in the death domain±containing University of Washington receptors, the death domain of FADD cannot induce Seattle, Washington 98195 apoptosis when overexpressed in mammalian cells and, in fact, can block the apoptosis mediated by Fas and TNFR1 in a dominant-negative fashion (Chinnaiyan et Summary al., 1995; Hsu et al., 1996b). FADD possesses another domain called the death effector domain at its N termi- Death receptor4 (DR4) is a recently described receptor nus, which can induce apoptosis when overexpressed for the cytotoxic ligand TRAIL that reportedly uses a in mammalian cells (Chinnaiyan et al., 1995; Hsu et al., FADD-independent pathway to induce apoptosis and 1996b). Through its death effector domain, FADD binds does not activate the NF-kB pathway. We have iso- to the proapoptotic apical caspase, Caspase 8 (also lated a new member of the tumor necrosis factor re- called FLICE, MACH, or Mch5) (Boldin et al., 1996; Fer- ceptor (TNFR) family, designated DR5, which bears a nandes-Alnemri et al., 1996; Muzio et al., 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Inflammatory Cytokine Regulation of Death Receptor
    INFLAMMATORY CYTOKINE REGULATION OF DEATH RECEPTOR- MEDIATED APOPTOSIS IN THYROID EPITHELIAL CELLS Emese MezQsi, M.D. Ph.D. Thesis Supervisor: Endre V. Nagy, M.D., Ph.D. Ist Department of Medicine Medical and Health Science Center University of Debrecen 2002 Table of Contents ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... 4 1. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ..................................... 6 1.1. FasL- and TRAIL-mediated apoptosis .................................................................. 6 1.2. Death receptor-mediated apoptosis in autoimmune thyroiditis ............................. 8 1.3. The role of inflammatory cytokines in autoimmune thyroiditis ............................ 9 1.4. Murine model of experimental autoimmune thyroiditis...................................... 10 1.5. Apoptosis in the pathogenesis of goiter nodules ................................................. 10 1.6. SCID mouse model for in vivo studies of human thyroid cancers....................... 11 2. SPECIFIC AIMS ........................................................................................................ 14 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS................................................................................ 15 3.1. Cell Culture Experiments..................................................................................... 15 3.1.1. Cell culture.................................................................................................... 15 3.1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Apo2l/TRAIL and Its Death and Decoy Receptors
    Cell Death and Differentiation (2003) 10, 66–75 & 2003 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 1350-9047/03 $25.00 www.nature.com/cdd Review Apo2L/TRAIL and its death and decoy receptors HN LeBlanc1 and A Ashkenazi*,1 The identification of two signalling receptors of the TNF receptor (TNFR) gene superfamily that bind Apo2L/TRAIL 1 Department of Molecular Oncology, Genentech, Inc., 1 DNA Way, South San pointed to the mechanism for induction of apoptosis by this Francisco, CA 94080, USA ligand: DR45 (death receptor 4 or TRAIL-R1) and DR5 * Corresponding author: A Ashkenazi, Department of Molecular Oncology, (TRAIL-R2)6–12 both contain a conserved death domain motif Genentech, Inc., 1 DNA Way, South San Francisco, CA 94080, USA. (Figure 1). The complexity of Apo2L/TRAIL’s receptor system Fax: 650 225 6127; E-mail: [email protected] is unprecedented: in addition to the two DRs, three other Received 21.5.02; accepted 28.10.02 receptors bind to Apo2L/TRAIL, and appear to act as ‘decoys’. 5,6,8,13,14 15–17 Edited by G Melino DcR1 (TRAIL-R3) and DcR2 (TRAIL-R4) have close homology to the extracellular domains of DR4 and DR5. DcR2 has a truncated, nonfunctional death domain, while Abstract DcR1 lacks transmembrane and death domains. Both Apo2 ligand or tumour necrosis factor-related apoptosis- receptors are therefore incapable of transmitting an apoptosis signal. A fifth binding protein, the soluble TNFR family inducing ligand (Apo2L/TRAIL) is one of the several members member osteoprotegerin (OPG), binds Apo2L/TRAIL but of the tumour necrosis factor (TNF) gene superfamily that has lower affinity at physiological temperature.18,19.
    [Show full text]